BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1224, 13 December 1882, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

At the conclusion of t. ke Harbor Board Meeting last evening, a . special meeting of the Borough Council was 1 'eld. The Town Clerk menti. oned ttee business to be discussed, viz.: Th e Watfjr Supply from the Patutahi, the proposed bridge across the Turanga.nui rivei and Mr Drummond’s reply to Mr Tatleyh i repert, THE WATER SUI 'PLY, The Chairman stated tha X the Committee appointed had visited the ground, but had not prepared a report. He might mention verbally, that as far as Mr Tutchen could judge from the aneroid, t’ne place where it was proposed to brin£ the w» ,ter from would be about 250 feet above tb e level of Gisborne. He also stated that ’ne estimated the water shed at about 2000 ac» es. He fancied the Waiherere scheme woul4 be cheaper. Mr Tutchen said that he ha d borrowed the aneroid, and had received ini itruutions first from one, and then from and ther, and this information was bo utterly at variance, that he get the thing mixed up. After some discussion it w as decided to let the report stand over, and in the meantime Mr Tutchen and the Etq (ineer should vist the ground ; but the latte r, it was understood, to have charge of the instrument. THE PROPOSED BRIDGE ACROSS THE TURAN GANUI. The Chairman stated that thi estimated cost was £3,820, of which the Bc>rough had only to pty one-fourth, as under the Roads and Bridges Construction Act the Government would advance, the whole of the money, one-fourth of which had to be returned within ten years.

Some of the Crs. were of opinion that the Bridge was more a matter for the County Council, as it would considerably benefit property which was under their control. The plans having been examined and discussed. Cr. Tucker moved, and Cr. Whinray seconded, the following:—“That application to the Government be made in conformity with Clause 20 of the Roads and Bridges Construction Act, for a sum of £4,000, for the purpose of constructing a bridge at the foot of Gladstone Road, and that a copy of the plans and specifications be forwarded to the County Council, and their assistance requested, and that a committee to consist of the Public Works Committee and other Crs. who wid attend shall wait on the County Council at the next meeting in furtherance of this object. The Town Clerk read an exhaustive letter replied to the question whic • had recently ci opped up in connection wii-lr the shingle placed on Camarvon-street (McDevitt’s con-tra-’t). It will be remembered that the Public Works Committee appointed Mr Tattley to examine the quantifies, and he gave as a result. that only about La.f of the shingle wa- delivered alt hot gh the who.e was cert ified to by tne Engineer. Mr Ih’uinninnd’s reply was argumentative, and boldly as well as ably written. We regret that owing to pleasure on our spa e wears unable to pithlsh it. m exteuse. Mr?Drinn mond argued that the nature of Hie stuff would prevent, any accurate measurement as to quantity bring arrived at. Weather, wind, and traffic, and the nature of the' ground would make a wondreful deal of difference in a very short l ime. A letter from Capt in Winter was read confirming Mr Drummond’s statements. Cr. Whinrny advised that- the discussion on the report supplied should he considered by a full meetn g of the ' ouncil. He admitted that through the causes memioneri a loss occur, but not to the extent mentioned by M r Ta'th y. Cr. Tutchen said he would venture to say th it there was not a dray in the place 'vould hold a yard and a half of shingle. Cr. Clayton said that he had regularly measured the stuff placed on the road and found there -was a depth of two inches oniy instead of four. Cr. Whinray said he was of opinion that although the reply might be considered later the con ractor would have to be paid. Fhe Town Clerk said that Mr McDevitt had notified to him that if he was not paid by 10 o’clock in the morning he would take legal proceedings. Cr. Tutchen said the Council had never been fairly treated in these matters. Mr Drummond said that imputations such as these were unfair. Cr Tucker said there could be no use in mincing matters. Either the Engineer, the foreman, and the contractor had conspired to swindle the Council or they had not. He was of opinion they had not, and he was always averse to thinking his fellow-men guilty until their uuilt was actually proved He would move that the account be paid less tw«» and a half chains, which had not been completed. On the motion of Cr. Whinray, seconded by Cr. Lewis, it was decided that the consideration of the report by the Engineer be adjourned until next meeting.